Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

[email protected]*^%#* Hi Vis Vests

Old 9th Dec 2011, 11:48
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,298
Angel

Another refugee thread from the depths of the R&N and PF forums.
DX Wombat is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 11:50
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,207
Also it takes two to tango - how much "training" do drivers on the ramp have before being let out unsupervised?
Less every day, the peanut/monkey equation. Apparently that's the fault of the Global Economy, where third world conditions are re-introduced to the first world to protect shareholder value and executive bonuses .
Don't get me started...oops, you already did.
Worrals in the wilds is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 11:54
  #43 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,539
I have been riding motor bikes, working on building sites etc. for 50 years previously without one and I'm still here.
I know someone not wearing a seatbelt thrown from a car in an accident where her car ended up completely crushed (an old style mini) which probably saved her life. Using your logic should I stop wearing a seatbelt?

We all hate the obsessive and OTT H & S bullshit but underlying it is a massive reduction in deaths and injuries from the bad old days, building sites being a prime example.

We all hate being compelled to do anything but is it such a hardship to wear a high viz vest/jacket?

A pal of mine was run over and suffered a broken ankle on the apron at Leeds/Bradford in the days gone by. A jacket may have helped it may not but it certainly wouldn't have INCREASED his chances of getting hit!

I noted in a documentary on RR jet engines that every single person ever on the shop floor wore both high viz clothing of some sort AND eye protection. Is that OTT? I only have one pair of eyes and wear eye protection when doing many simple and quick tasks. I have a pal who lost sight in one eye when using a strimmer.

I will put up with looking like a dork and complying with what are sometimes rules in unnecessary situations thank you.
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 12:01
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,949
We all hate being compelled to do anything but is it such a hardship to wear a high viz vest/jacket?
M.Mouse, agree and I always comply with the regulation but, I have to say, I do so under duress!

Yes, on balance, I think it's a good idea but I do think that crew look unsightly when walking out to the a/c in these hideous outfits!

Suppose what I don't like is the attitude of some of the "jobsworth" that enforce the use of them - I have, on occasions, genuinely forgotten to don my high viz vest - does that make me a criminal?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 12:30
  #45 (permalink)  
bnt
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland. (No, I just live here.)
Posts: 712
Well, I was trying to answer the original question, which was about something that "proves conclusively". I just don't think that's possible to do with a controlled study, never mind a historical study (over time) or a longitudinal study (between different airports). So there are no guarantees, and we're left with "playing the odds".

It's a perennial annoyance to me that people say they want to wait for "conclusive proof" before doing anything.I can understand that if they're asked to do something difficult and/or expensive to counter a small risk, but we see it in silly cases too. There are still people arguing over seatbelts in cars, for example, because their life-saving abilities are not perfect or guaranteed to work every time. Considering that they're a minor inconvenience and don't add much to the cost, any statistical improvement means you should wear them.

I think that's true of the Hi-Viz vest argument: they are not a guarantee of safety, nor do they absolve the wearer of the need to act safely - but I've seen the difference they make in conditions of poor visibility. Can we at least agree that "being seen" is better than "not being seen", even if it's only a small difficult-to-measure difference in statistical terms?
bnt is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 12:52
  #46 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,013
Not long ago the RAF made us wear camouflage cream on our faces so we couldn't be seen in the cockpits of our 7 tonne battlefield helicopters.

The Army thought it hilarious because everybody, including the enemy, already knew where we sat.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 13:06
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,949
Sorry but the comparison with wearing seat belts doesn't wash with me.

It's a fair question - what statistical (or experimental) evidence is there that wearing a high viz makes any difference to the incidence of serious injury or death?

At the moment it would seem nobody has the answer to that question.
fireflybob is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 13:38
  #48 (permalink)  
iws
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Nr. Edinburgh
Posts: 18
So are you seriously suggesting that common sense doesn't apply regarding the fact that Hi-vis obviously makes one more visible?
iws is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 13:49
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,949
So are you seriously suggesting that common sense doesn't apply regarding the fact that Hi-vis obviously makes one more visible?
Yes my common sense (!) indicates that Hi-vis makes one more visible on most occasions BUT that does not mean that they make me "safer" - I think this is the crux of the argument.

If the driver of a vehicle is not paying attention (one only has to think of mobile phones, radios in vehicles, chatting to your mate etc) I could be dressed like the proverbial Christmas tree and still get run down.

Isn't that what experimental research is about? We might have a feeling that some act makes us safer but is that really true?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 13:59
  #50 (permalink)  
Drain Bamaged
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Earth
Age: 51
Posts: 396
Next stage: What they are doing in aircraft carriers.
Each group having their own designated color vests with a few reflective bands stitched on it.

People on the Flight Deck


I would even create a new set of color for baggage handlers.




Pink!
ehwatezedoing is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 14:01
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Uk
Age: 63
Posts: 218
As an ex graphic designer (don't laugh) I have often wondered if the preponderance of hi-vis items in our world makes some other items (humans) actually LESS visible. I'm thinking of contrast here. You see the hi-vis but fail to see the lo-vis. The term situational awareness springs to mind. I carry a hi-res vest but bughard if I'm going to wear it in Tesky.
Pelikal is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 14:02
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,949
Next stage: What they are doing in aircraft carriers.
Each group having their own designated color vests with a few reflective bands stitched on it.

People on the Flight Deck


I would even create a new set of color for baggage handlers.




Pink!
Now that would be a good idea! Bags I have the Pink one!
fireflybob is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 14:50
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richmond Texas
Posts: 304
I dunno.

Some time ago at Bagotville two guys wearing light grey parkas were hit by a snow blower. Their good fortune was that the vehicle had broken a shear pin seconds before and the scrolls weren't turning. Close though.

After an excellent landing etc...
Flash2001 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 16:50
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Swindon, Wilts,UK
Posts: 563
Not long ago the RAF made us wear camouflage cream on our faces so we couldn't be seen in the cockpits of our 7 tonne battlefield helicopters.
In which case definitely don't wear hi viz in the cab.
Couple a nights ago when it was slashing down with rain and bible black as it were I saw what I thought was a nutter on a penny farthing, well it was too high to be a safety bicycle. As I got closer I found it was actually a guy in a big black van waiting to pull onto the road. The retroreflective strips stood out long before I could make out the rest of it and due to angle and other traffic the headlights weren't obviously visible.
Windy Militant is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 18:35
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northampton
Posts: 516
In between flying, I did some work as a HGV driver earlier this year, the same time I lost most of my faith in humanity -

I had just driven my artic through a car park and pulled up to unload from the side. Bear in mind, I was not even going to enter the plant area of the building I was delivering to.

As I was opening the side curtain (wearing a high vis, I must add), shirt and tie approaches me (in the car park) -

"Excuse me, what do you think you're doing? This is a high traffic environment. Where is your hard hat? Where are your steel toe capped boots? Where are your safety goggles? Where are your gloves?"

This is not bullsh*t. It actually happened...
Halfbaked_Boy is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 18:51
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 1,183
Yeah, it's the hard hats which bug me, especially when it's some dolly on the BBC news perched at the very edge of a building site or something. Usually preceded by the stupid warning that the following clip contains flash photography. Ludicrous.
Mr Optimistic is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 19:04
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,473
Hard hats do my head in as well,watched a thing about a archeological dig tother week,miles out in the country nowt above them but the clear blue sky and the universe beyond that, and the silly baggas were all wearing hard Hats wtf for???
I nearly kiiled someone with a hard hat once,working at the top of a huge blast furnace in Lackenby,we had been issued with real heavy duty safety kit including hard hats that seemd to weigh about a stone,leaned over the rail to shriek instructions at me mate standing about sixty feet below and off popped this bloody helmet, missed him by about two feet and made a large crater in the sand below.
tony draper is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 19:13
  #58 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,394
How many a/c on the ramp are taxiing at line speeds of 50 mph and are equipped with horns
Can't speak for taxing at speeds of 50 mph, however, the 727 does have a horn in the nose gear well. Can't hear the blasted thing if the APU or the engines are running, but its got one.

Well I take that back, you can hear the horn if you're standing in the nose gear well.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 19:45
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: gone surfin'
Age: 54
Posts: 2,331
WHERE'S THE PROOF
well I guess you can't prove anything. Or for that matter disprove anything. And of course "no evidence of effect," is not the same as "evidence of no effect."

I s'pose there's various ways of supporting the theory that HV vests prevent deaths.

Top of "the scale" in terms of robustness of evidence would be large scale "randomised control trial," designed to prove, "with confidence" that HV vests prevent deaths. The study could involve randomising enough people into two groups, one group wearing HV vests, the other not wearing HV vests. Then follow up death rates between the two.

This probably won't happy for 2 reasons, firstly there's no money in it, and secondly, it's probably not ethical. (Which is why we don't have grade I studies demonstrating the link between smoking and cancer.)

Bottom of the scale is "expert opinion." Known in the research world as Grade V. An example of this would be some high esteemed person, such as myself, moaning that he nearly run someone over on Castle Mill Lane yesterday, 'cos it was dark, and they weren't wearing a HV vest.

Somewhere in the middle are "cohort" or epidemiological study, - eg the airside crew in Lagos wore HV vests, and died less, whilst people got run over by catering trucks at Manchester 'cos they didn't-or were wearing the wrong shade.

I can sniff a research project, anyone up for funding me. Could do with a year sat on me'bum.



Remember having to wear a HV vest for my cross country qualier from EGCB to EGNH. At the time, you didn't have to wear a vest at Barton, but you did at Blackpool. Luckily, I was able to lend one from the legendary Dave D. Only when I arrived back at Barton did I realise it said "Chief Flying Instructor" on the back. Glad no-one asked me any questions
gingernut is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 19:53
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 895
Could do with a year sat on me'bum.

Wearing hi-vis pants of course.
vulcanised is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.